Paper presented to the
International Workshop on Social Audit, Social Accounting and Accountability,
Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic, 15th – 16th May 2008
The carbon neutral public sector: an agenda for research
Amanda Ball1, Ian Mason2, Suzana Grubnic3 and Phil Hughes4
1
Department of Accounting, Finance and Information Systems, and 2Department of Civil and
Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand;
3
Accounting and Finance Division, University of Nottingham, UK; 4Halcrow, Australia.
Abstract
In this paper, recent initiatives to implement public sector carbon neutrality in three
OECD countries are reviewed in the context of the increasing visibility of climate change issues
both in the media and on the political agenda. “Leading by example” has consistently been cited
as a rationale for adoption of carbon neutral strategies, although factors including the size of public
sector greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the contribution of the public sector to the economy
are also relevant. In our three example countries, ‘direct mandate’ by the Prime Minister (NZ);
‘organic development’ from wider central government sustainability initiatives (UK); and a more
‘laissez faire’ attitude as in Australian Commonwealth Government situation, were identified as
the general pathways leading to public sector carbon neutrality implementation.
A review of the public management literature revealed virtually no analysis or debate
regarding public sector carbon neutrality or climate change strategies. Issues which arose in
assessing the current situation of the public service included: a lack of understanding of the
implementation process for carbon neutrality; a need to identify and critically examine the
“threshold” at which mitigation efforts cease and offsetting is adopted; an absence of any
evaluation of the “leading by example” rationale; a lack of country comparisons across various
governmental systems; a gap in understanding the relationship with economic and social aspects of
sustainability; and a need to evaluate the utility of the department or discrete organization as a unit
of analysis. The context for these topics is the efficacy of carbon neutrality in relation to the time
frame and scale of reductions of GHG emissions which are so urgently required. In order to
redress this situation, and in light of the pressing nature of the climate change situation, we
therefore propose an agenda of for research which encompasses these topics. Finally, we urge
academics to consider research in this area with a view to contributing to the interdisciplinary
solutions which we believe are required.
1
1. Introduction
This paper argues for research into to the effectiveness of the carbon neutral public sector1
as an agent for meaningful action on climate change. According to widely adopted protocols
(WBCSD/WRI, 2004; ISO, 2006) the process for achieving carbon neutral status includes an
organisation measuring greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with its activities, reducing
emissions where possible, and offsetting remaining emissions to have a zero carbon impact. We
adopt the UK Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) definition of a carbon neutral
organization, as follows:
“…one that causes no net accumulation of CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. Therefore carbon neutrality
allows emissions to be netted of in some other location, a process which is called ‘offsetting’. However the
SDC would caution against a carbon neutrality policy which is focused solely on carbon offsetting. As the
aim should be to reduce overall emissions over time, simply offsetting emissions without a carbon
management strategy in place is at best misconceived, and at worst counter-productive.” (SDC, 2005).
Climate change moved to centre stage on the political agenda of many Western countries in
concert with a number of landmark publications (Gore, 2006; Gore et al., 2006; Stern, 2006; IPCC,
2007), and the award of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC). The international scientific consensus, articulated in the IPCC report,
is that “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal…” and that “Most of the global average
warming over the past 50 years is very likely (IPCC emphasis) due to anthropogenic greenhouse
gas (GHG) increases…”(IPPC, 2007). We proceed on the basis that this science can be accepted.
However, we believe along with others e.g. Metz and van Vuuren (2006) that the nature of the
climate change problem will require more than economic or technical solutions; and that the
academic community must work in a multi-disciplinary fashion in order to integrate social,
technical, engineering and economic perspectives to contribute solutions. In this spirit, this paper
is co-written by academic accountants, an environmental engineer, and a practitioner with
substantial policy and practical experience of ‘greening’ public sector organizations.
The backdrop to the paper is the response by several governments to the climate change
agenda. Between February and June, 2007, the governments of New Zealand, Costa Rica and
Norway independently issued significant statements of their intentions regarding carbon-neutrality.
On 13 February 2007, New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark announced to Parliament: “I
1The
public sector is pragmatically defined as organizations included in the Whole of Government Accounts, and can
include national, regional and local government bodies, publicly owned corporations, health boards, and research and
educational institutions (Ball and Grubnic, 2007).
2
believe that New Zealand can aim to be the first nation to be truly sustainable—across the four
pillars of the economy, the society, the environment, and nationhood. I believe that we can aspire
to be carbon neutral in our economy and way of life.” (Clark, 2007). On 21 February 2007, it was
reported that the government of Costa Rica was developing plans to begin offsetting all the
country’s carbon dioxide emissions (McPhaul, 2007a) and on June 7, 2007 President Oscar Arias
announced “Here's the big goal, which I am personally declaring for the first time tonight. By
2021, Costa Rica's 200th birthday, we will be a carbon neutral country” (McPhaul, 2007b).
Meanwhile, on 19 April, 2007, Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg had announced in a
speech to the Norwegian Labour Party that “In the period up to 2050, Norway will undertake to
reduce global greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 100% of our own emissions.” (Anon,
2007a). Subsequently the target date for Norwegian carbon neutrality was brought forward to
2030 (Archer and Bergsli, 2008). Although several media reports have presented these quests in
terms of a race to be first in the carbon-neutrality stakes (Marks, 2007; McPhaul, 2007a; Anon,
2008a), it is possible that many poorer countries are virtually carbon-neutral due to poverty
limiting their ability to generate substantial levels of CO2.
The New Zealand vision is of particular interest in that it was accompanied by systematic
plans for a carbon-neutral public sector, with a commitment for six Government Departments to
become carbon neutral by 2012, and for the remaining 22 core public service departments to
develop plans during that period. In Costa Rica the emphasis appeared to be on government
funded tree-planting programmes, a voluntary carbon tax on visitors and businesses, the “cleaning
up” of fossil fuel-fired power plants, and the promotion of hybrid vehicles. Norway, the world’s
5th largest oil exporter, has proposed state investment in carbon capture and storage (CCS)
technology, increased fuel taxation, and planting trees and stopping deforestation in developing
countries. The public sector is also a core element in other government strategies, notably that of
the UK, with for example “Central Governments office estate to be carbon neutral by 2012” (SDC,
2006). Significant areas of the wider public sector, notably local governments, are also getting in
on the act. For example, in December, 2007 the Wellington City Council, in New Zealand, agreed
to achieve carbon neutrality by 2012 (WCC, 2007).
Although there is evidence that public sector organizations are either taking up carbon
neutrality, or being asked to become carbon neutral, there is little evidence of academic debate or
research that provides a detailed analysis of the outworking of a carbon neutral approach to climate
change policy for different public sector functions. This situation needs to be redressed, given the
huge political, media and public concern with international policy goals for stabilizing global
temperature; and the possibility that ‘carbon neutrality’ will become a primary policy goal.
3
In order to contribute an agenda for research, the remainder of this paper is structured into
three substantive sections.
The next section discusses possible insights from the academic
literature. Based on the authors’ expertise and physical locations, section 3 looks in more detail at
how policies and approaches to carbon neutrality are being implemented in New Zealand,
Australia and the United Kingdom. Building on insights from theory and practice of carbon
neutrality in the public sector, section 4 provides an analysis and agenda for research on carbon
neutrality.
2. Literature Review
Climate change has occupied natural science researchers for many decades (Christianson,
1999; Weart, 2003). In 1988 the IPCC was created to “evaluate the state of climate science as a
basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific
literature” (Oreskes, 2004) and their current position is now widely known. Whilst assertions of
significant debate within the scientific community continue to be propagated in the media, most
relevant scientific bodies hold similar positions to that of the IPCC e.g. Anon (2005), and there is
little disagreement with the consensus position (Oreskes, 2004).
In the technology and
engineering literature significant bodies of work concerned with technical solutions to the problem
of excessive carbon emissions have appeared – for example, from the early 1990’s onward on how
to capture and store carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired electricity generation.
This
literature has recently begun to address the public perception of such solutions e.g. Huijts et al.
(2007), and journals such as “Energy Policy” embrace topics including “economics, planning,
politics, pricing, forecasting, investment, conservation, substitution and environment”.
Although a growing body of work addresses high level strategies for making substantial
reductions (up to 90% compared to 1990 levels) in the GHG emissions of the industrialised
societies (e.g. Dyson, 1976; Kok et al, 2002; Pacala & Socolow, 2004; Verweij et al., 2006;
Monbiot, 2006; IPCC 2007), there is an absence of discussion about organisation-level responses
to climate change to inform our study. But as Vermeulen and Kok (2002) argue, although
reductions of this magnitude will require actions at national or international levels, “in most cases
the transitions depend on far-less structured decision-making mechanisms”. This will necessarily
depend on “the acceptance and willingness of many (our emphasis) businesses, local institutions
and individuals to contribute to the transitions.”
Ideas about how business organisations might address climate, ‘carbon accounting’ and
‘neutrality’, would seem to fit with the extant corporate social responsibility (e.g., Jackall, 1988;
4
Fineman, 2001; Crane, 2000) and accountability literatures (e.g. Milne et al., 2006, 2007ab), but
this work has barely begun to address either the conceptual framework, or the detail, of how
organizations’ responsibilities in respect of climate change will occur.
In the social and
environmental accounting research literature, there is, notably, “…almost a complete absence of
any "carbon accounting" (Gray et al., 2007). A partial explanation may be that until very recently
large, transnational corporations in particular were in fact engaged in aggressive lobbying against
climate policies, a position they rapidly reversed following the Kyoto Conference; and business
has only very recently begun to take a more proactive position on climate (e.g. Gough and
Shackley, 2001; Vermeulen and Kok, 2002; Levy and Rothenberg, 2002; Becken, 2004). Even
with this change, corporate perspectives are reported as being based on economic interests, and
scepticism towards climate change science is “institutionalized within American companies”
(Levy and Rothenberg, 2002).
In the public sector, the literature underlines the role of local government agencies in
particular as having responsibilities and decision-making powers in traffic, public transport,
economic development, housing, and urban and land-use planning which have led to a “degree of
political support for climate change policies”, but with authorities lacking central government
political and financial support, as well as, in many cases, competence to act (Ball, 2002; Coenen
and Menkveld, 2002; Vermeulen and Kok, 2002; Allman et al. 2004).
Perhaps unsurprisingly,
then, insights into how public sector organisations address climate change are absent from such
journals as Public Management Review in the public management literature.
Other literature does offer insights about the outworking of carbon neutrality. Increasing
debate is occurring over the role of offsetting (e.g. Bäckstrand and Lövbrand, 2006; Smith, 2007),
and the extent to which it can be a real contributor to GHG reductions (e.g. Gössling et al., 2007),
as opposed to simply being a means of moving responsibilities elsewhere, sometimes with
sometimes inequitable results (O’Riordan, 2004) or perverse environmental outcomes (Bäckstrand
and Lövbrand, 2006).
Yet, worryingly, it seems that offsetting as opposed to mitigation is
dominating corporate organizational strategies on climate change (Jordan and Lorenzoni, 2007;
Thornes and Randalls, 2007).
The ‘grey’ literature (Auger, 1998; GreyNet, 2008) is the source of a considerable amount
of the material appearing in this field from “research-based groups” (Gough and Shackley, 2001),
for example the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research (UK) and the PEW Centre on Global
Climate Change in the USA, and is a notable phenomenon. However, the lack of peer-review
means that such sources must be treated with caution.
5
To summarise, insights from the peer-reviewed literature into role and efficacy of the
public sector in climate change mitigation to assist with the paper are, unfortunately, virtually nonexistent.
3. Developments in Practice
3.1 New Zealand
The New Zealand Government proposed relatively detailed plans and guidelines for the
achievement of carbon neutrality following on from the 2007 announcement by Prime Minister
Helen Clark (op cit). This mandate was passed to the Ministry for the Environment, who assumed
a leadership and co-ordination role, but also to individual departments, each of which has a
responsibility to deliver contracted services to a Minister of the Crown.
Six lead departments
were selected to become carbon neutral by 2012 on the basis of their data collection performance
in a sustainability initiative known as Govt3, which focused on waste reduction, buildings,
transport, office consumables and equipment (MfE, 2008). This programme produced energy
data, which would be crucial in assessing carbon emissions, and sustainable procurement
information. Significant features of the carbon neutrality guidelines include a) an emphasis on
mitigation prior to offsetting, b) a clear statement that some offsetting will nonetheless be required,
and c) that offsetting projects will be located within New Zealand and managed by a single
agency.
The “leading by example” ethic is clearly invoked as the primary rationale for the initiative
(MfE, 2007a), whilst recognising at the same time that the direct impact of public service carbon
neutrality on national CO2 emissions will be small at approximately 2% of New Zealand’s total
emissions (MfE, 2007b). The emphasis on mitigation prior to offsetting is explicitly stated and
justified in terms of maintaining credibility:
“Offsetting emissions without having made plausible efforts to reduce emissions first would compromise the
credibility of a carbon neutrality initiative and could possibly prevent external verification of departments’
carbon neutral status.”. (MfE, 2007b)
The subsequent use of offsetting is justified on the basis that 100% emissions reduction
solely by mitigation measures is not considered a practical possibility, largely on account of
transport issues (MfE, 2007d). The issue of achieving authentic permanent carbon sequestration
(permanence) from offsetting projects is included, and in fact made a legal requirement (MfE,
6
2007c).
The potential for conflict between carbon neutrality aspirations and conventional
economic goals is recognised and the need to identify the threshold at which offsets become the
preferred option has been highlighted as a matter for further investigation (MfE, 2007b). The
threshold issue is one which we believe to be of particular relevance for future research.
Departments are given specific guidance in terms of the time frame for initial offsetting
actions:
“For the 5 departments for which we have good existing baseline information, trees will be planted on New
Zealand Crown land in winter 2008 to offset the residual emissions so that these departments become fully
carbon neutral by 2012 when tree growth will exceed emissions. Modelling shows that approximately 6
square kilometres of forest would be required to offset the 5 departments for 20 years.”
(MfE, 2007d)
Target dates for reporting were also clearly specified and emissions inventories and
emissions reduction plans for all 34 departments were posted on the MfE website on 4 April, 2008.
Accounting requirements are prescribed and independent auditing of offset projects indicated:
“The Carbon Neutral Public Service programme will be required to have an accurate, transparent and
auditable registry system to demonstrate the retirement2 of the credits or offsets used in the Carbon Neutral Public
Service programme…The Ministry for the Environment will commission an independent auditor to validate forestry
offset projects and certify they have sequestered the necessary amount of carbon in order to claim carbon neutrality for
the six Stage 1 agencies.” (MfE, 2007c).
Other provisions clearly spell out the management structures to be set in place. The
potential role of carbon markets and the price of carbon is identified, signalling an expectation the
public sector will be involved in some aspects of carbon trading (MfE, 2007b). Credits will be
managed through a New Zealand Emissions Units Register.
Overall we believe that a relatively robust approach to implementing a carbon neutral
strategy in the public sector has been outlined in New Zealand, at least for the first 6 departments
involved. The degree to which this vision will be fulfilled, and the barriers and opportunities
which are revealed over the next few years will be informative, and provide considerable
opportunities for research. This we will elaborate on in the discussion and analysis to follow.
3.2 Australia
In Australia, as with many responses to policy problems addressed at Commonwealth,
State and Territory level, there has been a range of carbon neutral public sector responses, and
7
differing levels of commitment. Drawing on policy documents, we summarise key responses
towards climate change and a carbon neutral public sector in table 1, which highlights relevant
climate change strategy, overall emissions reduction target, carbon neutral commitment and key
public sector actions.
Table 1: Selected Australian Commonwealth, State and Territory Key Responses to Carbon
Neutrality in the Public Sector
Jurisdiction
Public Sector
Employees
(2007)
Overall Strategy
Overall
Target:
emissions
Australia
230,800
(Commonwealth)
In development
Limit emissions in 2008-2012
to 108 percent of its
emissions in 1990 (Kyoto
target)
Commitment
to
national
emission
trading system
Major study (Garnaut
review) to report on
future directions in
mid-2008
New South
Wales
503,300
NSW
Greenhouse
Plan 2005-08
NSW State Plan 2006
Victoria
360,000
GHG
Key Instruments/ Actions
Not explicit
Energy
Efficiency
in
Government
Operations
program
Energy intensity portfolio
targets and environmental
management systems (EMS)
Reduce emissions by 60% on
2000 levels by 2050
New Government buildings
minimum
of
4.5
star
environmental rating
60% cut in emissions by 2050
(from 2000) and a return to
year 2000 emission levels by
2025
Sustainability Action
Statement 2006
60% reduction in emissions
by 2050 (from 2000)
Victoria Greenhouse
Strategy
Victorian Renewable Energy
Target (VRET) requires 10%
of Victoria's energy to be
derived from renewable
sources by 2016
Energy
Efficiency
Action Plan 2006
Public
Sector
Carbon
Neutral
Commitment
Not explicit
Building energy management
Individual
agency
commitments
to
carbon neutrality e.g.
Sydney Water and
City of Sydney
$50 m on energy efficiency for
public facilities and schools
Partial: Government
car
fleet
carbon
neutral (from January
2007)
New Government buildings
minimum
of
5
star
environmental rating
Target to improve
Government energy
efficiency by 20% by
June
2010,
and
purchase 25% of
electricity as Green
Power by June 2010
Retrofitting of state housing
properties
$15 m on energy efficiency for
public hospitals, schools and
aged care facilities
Expansion of EMS use by
departments
150
hybrid
vehicles
government fleet
in
Individual
agency
commitments
to
carbon neutrality e.g.
EPA Victoria, Parks
Victoria
Queensland
334,800
Climate Smart 2050:
Queensland Climate
Change
Strategy
2007: a low carbon
future
60% reduction in emissions
by 2050 (from 2000)
Carbon
neutral
government
office
buildings by 2020
Energy Management Strategy
to address agencies energy use
Commitment to source 5%
renewable energy
Offset emissions from the
vehicle fleet: 50% by 2010 and
100% by 2020
Western
Australia
173,600
Making Decisions for
the Future: Climate
Change
Action
Statement 2007
60% reduction in emissions
by 2050 (from 2000)
Purchasing 20% of its
electricity from renewable
energy sources by 2010
8
Partial:
State
Government car fleet
is carbon neutral
Energy Smart
Program
Government
Smart Government purchasing
Jurisdiction
Public Sector
Employees
(2007)
Overall Strategy
Overall
Target:
emissions
GHG
Public
Sector
Carbon
Neutral
Commitment
Key Instruments/ Actions
South
Australia
128,800
Tackling
Climate
Change 2007-2020
Limit emissions to 108% of
1990 levels in 2008-12
SA Government to
reach carbon neutral
status for its own
operations by 2020
Purchase minimum of 30% of
accredited green power (50%
by 2014)
All ACT agencies
will work towards
becoming
carbon
neutral – to generate
no net emissions
from their activities
Resource management plans
(by 2009) with annual reporting
Reduce emissions by 60% (to
40% of 1990 levels) by 2050
Australia
Capital
Territory
88,100
Climate
Change
Strategy 2007-2025
Reduction of 60% of 2000
levels of emissions by 2050
Climate
Change
Action Plan 20072011
Milestone of limiting 2025
emissions to 2000 levels
All schools will
become
carbon
neutral by 2017
New Government buildings
minimum
of
5
star
environmental rating
$1 m energy efficiency loan
fund for agencies
School
environmental
management plans, energy
audits and reduction initiatives
Most Australian Governments have emphasized the role of government in “leading by
example” to reduce GHG emissions in key policy documents (see table 1). For example, on 18
February 2008, the South Australian Premier Mike Rann declared that “the State Government
must set a clear example by reducing its carbon footprint” given it was one of the largest GHG
emitters in South Australia (Rann, 2008). The State Government would work towards becoming
carbon neutral for its own operations by accelerated purchases of accredited Green Power and
other carbon offsets (Rann, op cit):

By 2010, offsetting 30 percent of GHG emissions by purchasing Green Power and the balance through the
purchase of other carbon offsets

By 2014, offsetting 50 percent of GHG emissions from its operations, achieved by purchasing of 50 percent
of its electricity requirements from Green Power and the balance by purchasing other carbon offsets

By 2020, offsetting all of its emissions to achieve carbon neutrality by purchasing an equal amount of Green
Power and other carbon offsets.
Earlier, in January 2008, South Australia’s Cabinet Ministers became the first in Australia
to offset the GHGs used in the course of their duties, including all air travel. In other jurisdictions,
not all Government Ministers or Members of Parliament have been as ready to commit to carbon
neutrality often leaving it to the core public sector.
As can be seen from table 1, some governments, such as South Australia and the Australia
Capital Territory, have been more committed to a carbon neutral public sector, whereas other
jurisdictions are only prepared to commit to a percentage reduction, or only focus on government
vehicle fleets (New South Wales and Victoria) or buildings (Queensland). In New South Wales
and Victoria, individual agencies have been allowed to assess the relative merits of becoming
carbon neutral and then take appropriate action.
9
Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Victoria, for example, has gone carbon neutral.
In February 2007, EPA Victoria (with some 400 staff) committed to becoming carbon neutral to
experience the challenges of going carbon neutral first hand and to provide practical support to
companies interested in climate change. EPA Victoria’s primary approach to carbon management
is to implement cost-effective, direct emission reduction projects in its operations. EPA is
committed to improving its carbon management plan each year in line with its own draft Carbon
Management Principles (EPA Victoria, 2007a) and the plan will be externally assured each year.
Two key lessons learned by EPA Victoria were the “concept of ‘carbon neutrality’ is not yet well
defined” and “the market for green power and offset products is evolving” (EPA Victoria, 2007b).
Australian Governments have significant purchasing power to influence the supply of
renewable energy (green power) and the supply of low emission goods and services. Adopting
more energy efficient practices and green purchasing is a short-term measure that provides savings
in government energy costs and supports the market for climate-friendly goods and services. In
Victoria, the Government has stated it will use its significant purchasing power when buying
everything from cars to paper, to send strong market signals for sustainable products and services.
The State Government of Victoria spends around 15 per cent of Victoria’s gross state product. The
Queensland Government also recognises its notable levels of spending on goods, services and
construction.
Australia is still determining how it will respond to climate change at the Commonwealth
(national) level although there has been a commitment to a national emission trading system by
2010 (Wong 2008). Following the change in Australian Government in late 2007, a strategic
review of climate change policies has been commissioned by the present Labour Government
(Tanner and Wong, 2008). The review, due in July 2008, will develop a set of principles to assist
its assessment of whether existing programs are complementary to an emissions trading scheme.
The future outlook for a carbon neutral public sector may in part be unclear pending the full
implementation of an ETS, and decisions on what other climate change programs are required that
are “efficient, effective and complementary to the emissions trading scheme” (Tanner and Wong,
2008).
3.3 United Kingdom
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair pledged that the public sector would lead by example to
combat climate change (SDC, 2005), and this was re-affirmed by then Secretary of State for the
Environment David Miliband (Defra, 2006). Government has committed to making its office
10
space carbon neutral by 2012 with the wider public sector following by 2015; and there is an
aspirational target of cutting GHG emissions from government offices by 30% by 2020.
Government has committed to offsetting emissions arising from official and ministerial air travel
from April 2006 and has developed a Government Carbon Offsetting Fund (GCOF) for this
purpose.
The Government’s intent may be inferred from the Climate Change Bill, a legislative
framework on the management of carbon emissions (Defra, 2007a), expected to become effective
by mid-2008. The Bill binds the UK to a 60% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050
against a 1990 baseline, a target reduction of 26-32% by 2020, and a system of carbon budgets that
will constrain the total amount of emissions in a given time period. The Committee on Climate
Change at the request of Government is currently considering an upward revision from 60% to
80%, although this falls short of the 100% claimed possible by the Liberal Democrats (Liberal
Democrats, 2007). Notably, the Government has requested the Committee to take into account
“economic circumstances, and in particular the likely impact of the decision on the economy and
the competitiveness of particular sectors of the economy” (Defra, 2007b).
At present, the Bill requires an annual emissions statement by the Government, an annual
progress report to Parliament by the ‘independent’ Committee on Climate Change, and an annual
response to that report by the Government. A strengthening of annual reporting is proposed in a
requirement, amongst others, that the Committee provide a view on whether targets and budgets
are likely to be met. The implication is that lack of progress toward Government specific targets
would undermine the overall emissions reduction framework. The Government have expressed
that top-down sectoral targets would be too prescriptive and unhelpful but, nevertheless,
expectations on opportunities for reducing emissions in different sectors would be provided in
budgets (Defra, 2008). Doubts on targets being met in the Bill coupled with Government not
meeting its targets would naturally call into question expectations set for other parts of the
economy.
Following commitments of a carbon neutral estate2, the Government developed the
Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate (SOGE) framework for assessing the
2
The pledge to offset carbon emissions from all government buildings was announced by former Prime Minister Tony
Blair on June 12 2006, and was attributed to an intention by government to lead by example on measures to combat
climate change. More cynically, commitments on a carbon neutral estate followed pronouncements by both the
Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties to assert themselves as concerned and able to protect the environment
(Hall, 2006).
3
The Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate (SOGE) framework issued in 2006 replaces the 2002
framework for Sustainable Development on the Government Estate.
11
sustainability of its activities3. All 21 core departments, together with executive agencies and selfselected non-departmental public bodies, report data to the Sustainable Development Commission
(SDC), an independent adviser to the UK Government, which analyses the data and illustrates
performance against each of the SOGE targets in a traffic light system.
At present, there is a debate on the issue of offsetting, with a request by SDC to
Government to supply definitive guidance. Unlike New Zealand, offsetting projects are not
required to take place within the physical boundaries of the nation (Defra, 2007b). On air travel,
the GCOF consists of a flexible portfolio of projects located across developing nations such as
Brazil and Vietnam, and developed nations such as China. Defra argues for the need to retain
some flexibility in the framework in the Climate Change Bill, but cautions that the purchasing of
emissions reductions credit “… may restrict the place of decarbonisation of the UK economy and
lead to higher mitigation costs in the long run” (Defra, 2007b).
The SOGE framework consists of three elements: fourteen SOGE outcome-orientated
performance targets; eight ‘Government to Mandate’ requirements; and, a series of commitments
on management and support functions. The 14 SOFE targets are further classified under climate
change and energy; sustainable consumption and production; and, natural resource protection.
Apparent within the targets is an emphasis upon reduction (e.g. reducing water consumption) and
on efficiency (e.g. energy). The latest report by the SDC points to unease over data quality and
management and, in some cases, a lack of understanding about how a department has performed
(SDC, 2007).
Results reported against the SOGE framework for the time period from April 2006 to
March 2007 are not encouraging, with over half of Departments not on track to meet reduction
targets of 12.5% by 2010/11 (SDC, 2007). Adjusting MOD data to exclude a recently privatised
organisation from the selected baseline data, carbon emissions from offices across the government
estate have reduced by 0.7%. Generally, excellent progress is reported against energy efficiency
and waste reduction targets, good progress against recycling and procurement of renewable
electricity, and some or no progress on carbon emissions from vehicles and reduction of water
consumption targets. No department reported verification by an external body suggesting caution
in viewing results. More positively, all Departments with the exception of four (from twenty)
indicate upward movements in ‘direction of travel’ (SDC, 2007), indicating an improvement in
performance compared to the previous year and a potential to recover.
All Departments have
achieved at least some progress on the renewable energy target (SDC 2007). The target of
12
sourcing at least 10% of electricity from renewables by 31 March 2008 has been exceeded, and
most recent results suggest that 28.3% of electricity is now sourced from renewable sources at
pan-governmental level (SDC, 2007).
The Local Government sector accounts for approximately 1.4% of the total UK building
energy consumption4, and emits in the region of 0.95 million tonnes of CO2 per annum (Anon,
2008b). Although the majority of councils have been reported as not having a climate change
strategy in place (Anon, 2007b), as at December 2007, a third of councils were engaged with the
Carbon Trust on its Local Authorities Carbon Management (LACM) programme. For example,
Belfast City Council has developed a Carbon Management Action Plan (with a focus on leisure
centres, vehicle fleets, landfill, offices and staff awareness) which includes baseline data on CO 2
emissions and cost, and provides outcomes on key actions (Anon, 2004). Another development in
Local Government is the ‘Merton rule’, which requires developers to install equipment on site to
deliver at least 10% of a new building’s energy from renewable sources. Since its introduction in
2003, over 100 authorities have adopted the rule and the London Authority has increased
minimum requirement to 20% (Seager, 2007). Other sources of change in the sector may follow
from Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s call for the creation of ‘eco-towns’ (Miller, 2008); and from
the Audit Commission’s introduction of natural resource management into its methodology for
assessing the performance of local authorities in England.
In summary, Central Government in the UK has focused upon legally enforcing the need to
reduce carbon emissions as a nation, and on establishing accountability frameworks to ensure
progress within government departments. Work is required within Departments and the broader
public sector to develop and maintain effective systems to monitor, measure and assess
environmental impacts of operations. Present systems are orientated toward housekeeping and
‘quick wins’, and the most current results by SDC suggests the need to reverse the trend in
amounts of carbon emitted. Local Government has a longer history in environmental practices
than other parts of the public sector, and carbon management strategies are emerging, if slowly.
4
Energy consumption mostly includes heating, lighting, and use of office equipment and air conditioning. The
statistic by the Carbon Trust is stated to encompass buildings ranging from housing and local estate offices to
community centres and sports centres as well as administrative offices.
13
4. Analysis: Determining the Research Agenda
4.1 Introduction
Ultimately, it is only the global set of carbon accounts that really matters. Here we seek to
examine whether ‘public sector carbon neutrality’ contributes to reduction of GHG concentrations
in the global atmosphere. Below we set out a research agenda in component parts, each potentially
contributing to the ‘bottom line’.
4.2 Implementing carbon neutrality: processes and systems
A useful research exercise will be to survey and summarise practice in implementing
carbon neutrality, with the aim of widely disseminating examples of best (and worst) practice to
the research and practice communities. The role of, and approach taken with, carbon accounting
and assurance, including standards (e.g. WBCSD/WRI, 2004; ISO, 2006), will be an important
focus here. This is to do with the straightforward reason that we expect other (financial) accounts
to be robust and audited; and the same should apply to carbon accounting (or any form of
environmental accounting).
The UK experience with the SOGE framework indicates a need for research into the ease
with which organisations establish data systems and establish baselines for setting targets; and
whether concern with production of data per se may serve to postpone or divert attention from
framing how services could be delivered in low-carbon ways.
4.3 The ‘offset threshold’
A recurrent theme in this paper has been the determination of the critical ‘offset threshold’
– i.e. the point at which public sector organisations ‘hit the wall’ for whatever reason, are unable to
reduce carbon emissions beyond a certain level, and go for off-setting. An important area for
research will be to identify where this critical point of balance is being struck in different
organizations and jurisdictions; and what sort of paradigm shift is required to move to a situation
where carbon neutral strategies become ‘mitigation intensive’ – i.e. where offsetting is the minor
part of the strategy and activities become decoupled from fossil fuel consumption.
We anticipate thorny issues arising in the use of offsetting, given that offsetting is known
to sometimes bring perverse environmental outcomes, e.g., the planting of single species
plantations negatively affecting biodiversity and stream flow. An important collaborative research
exercise, with the scientific and engineering community, will be to continually monitor the quality
and permanence of carbon offset programmes, including evaluation of the range of standards for
offsetting (e.g. The Gold Standard, 2008).
14
4.4 Leading by example?
The NZ, Australian and UK governments all stress that the public sector will lead by
example on carbon neutrality. A challenging topic for research will be to examine whether any
leading actually takes place, what is its character and what are its outcomes.
An interesting experiment would be to track the number of enquiries about how to go
carbon neutral received by lead agencies; and to track developments in organizations seeking
advice from public sector organizations. Other experiments might determine the extent to which
initiatives are taken up by employees outside the workplace.
Our discussion of developments in Australia demonstrated that the public sector’s use of its
purchasing power will be an important focus for research. A useful research exercise would be to
track the changes public sector organizations actually make over time, and in what areas of
expenditure, in order to try to influence the supply chain through the purchase of goods and
services that are sustainable, ethical and demonstrate value for money. A further question is how
far agencies would be prepared to go in changing purchasing or contracting behaviour. As Kerr
(2006) argues, the political economy of structural reform in natural resource use is fraught with
understandably resistant responses from parties who lose out. Thus we concur with O’Riordan
(2004) that an important aspect of this research will be to investigate partnership arrangements
between government, private capital and civil associations.
Given that public services are often determined by basic, personal social needs, research
into the public sector’s response to the use of offsets in particular should reveal important insights
about people’s behaviour when they encounter the ‘hitting the wall’ phenomenon. In the extreme,
could it be that going carbon neutral simply seems too full of contradictions and difficulties for
people to handle; and that the concept will end up in the ‘too hard’ basket? Herein lays a
fascinating research topic.
4.5 International Comparative Research
In writing this paper and focusing briefly on only three OECD countries, we have been
struck by the differences between governments’ approaches to committing their public sector to
become carbon neutral as part of a wider programme of policies on climate change. Our brief
country case studies reveal possibilities including a direct mandate from the Prime Minister (NZ);
the Australian experience appears to be somewhat laissez faire; and the UK model has evolved out
of government’s attempts to increase accountability for the sustainability of the government estate.
A worthwhile topic for international collaborative research will critically evaluate the differences
in approaches over a range of governmental systems. It would be of particular value to hear from
15
researchers in less economically developed (as opposed to western industrialized) countries, where
governments seem to have no voice in debates about a carbon neutral public sector. A useful
subsidiary question would be to ask what resources governments are committing to support the
transition – both in terms of support for internal carbon management initiatives, and in providing
assistance in response to consequent structural change.
4.6
Will carbon neutrality come to dominate at the expense of a fuller understanding of
sustainability issues?
We anticipate that carbon neutrality will become a core issue, if not a key performance
indicator, in many public sector organisations and agencies. Here we are mindful that accounting,
including ‘carbon accounting’, whilst hugely useful, can also turn the world into a series of
quantifications; questions of how many?, how much?, at what level? etc. Further dangers lie in the
enduring performance measurement focus in the public sector (Lapsley, 2008). Our concern here,
per the lessons of critical accounting research, is that to privilege the calculative eye of carbon
accounting may render less visible social and economic ideals. The alternative is to keep to the
fore the wider picture, inspired by the central problematic, as Orr (2007) puts it: “So, what does a
carbon-neutral society and increasingly sustainable society look like?”
Here we are also mindful of the wider mentality of business-case, win-win, arguments for
eco-efficiency, or going carbon neutral in the private sector; which privilege easy wins, but do not
address underlying problems of what gets produced and consumed and why (Milne et al., 2006,
2007ab; Orr, 2007).
4.7 Unit of analysis
Carbon neutrality strategies in NZ, Australia and the UK indicate that the unit of analysis
for the carbon neutral public sector is the government department, agency or other organization.
An important area for research is to examine the impact of using this unit of analysis in the context
of the national and global carbon account. This raises the question of whether governments should
identify the ‘big hitters’ in their public sectors; allowing some an easier ride. For instance,
amongst the 6 NZ lead government departments on carbon neutrality, are the carbon impacts of the
policy-based Treasury significant in comparison to the much larger, operations-based Department
of Conservation? Further questions arise where the public sector is engaged in major climatechange-causing activities, for instance in the coal industry (which operates as a state-owned
enterprise in NZ, for instance).
16
4.8 Time-frame and rate of contraction of emissions
We argue that at the heart of any concern with climate change strategies must be a
connection with the ineluctable reality of climate change science. All the available evidence
points to a need for a rapid rate of emissions reduction in order to improve our chances of living
comfortably on the planet (Meyer, 2000); with targets commonly set to be met by 2030-2050 (i.e.
soon). Perhaps out of all possible roles for academics is the need to design research which
continually engages politicians, and policy- and decision-makers about the essential concern with
achieving a stabilisation of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere; and about their professional
and personal motives for actions they take which increase or reduce GHG emissions.
5. Conclusions
Public sector carbon neutrality has been mandated or voluntarily adopted in three OECD
countries where climate change issues are high on the political agenda.
In all jurisdictions
reviewed in this paper, government agencies have consistently stressed the rationale of “leading by
example” for adoption of carbon neutral strategies.
Our introductory look at developments
internationally suggests that there are at least three different paths to public sector carbon
neutrality. These are ‘direct mandate’ by the Prime Minister (NZ); ‘organic development’ from
wider central government sustainability initiatives (UK); and a more ‘laissez faire’ attitude as in
Australian Commonwealth Government situation.
The public management literature is notable in that it contains virtually no academic
analysis or debate regarding public sector carbon neutrality or climate change strategies. We
believe that there is an urgent need to redress this situation, and have therefore identified an
agenda of pressing issues for research.
These are, to summarise: understanding the
implementation process; identifying and debating the offset threshold; critically evaluating the
“leading by example” rationale; initiating country comparisons across various governmental
systems; understanding the relationship with economic and social aspects of sustainability; and
investigating the utility of the department or discrete organization as a unit of analysis. An
overriding goal is to evaluate and engage debate about the efficacy of carbon neutrality in the
context of the time frame and scale of reductions of GHG emissions which are so urgently
required.
Given the current predominance of carbon neutrality as a national, public sector and
business response to climate change, we urge academics to consider addressing these issues both
17
from the perspective of their own disciplines, and with a view to contributing to the
interdisciplinary solutions which we believe are required.
References:
Allman, L., Fleming, P. and Wallace, A., 2004. The Progress of English and Welsh local
authorities in addressing climate change. Local Environment, 9 (3), 271-283.
Anon., 2004. Carbon Management Action Plan., Belfast City Council, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Anon., 2005. A guide to facts and fictions about climate change. The Royal Society, London, UK
Anon., 2007a. Norway 'carbon neutral by 2050'. Norway: the official site in the UK Available at:
http://www.norway.org.uk/policy/news/carbon-neutral.htm Accessed: February, 2008
Anon., 2007b. Local government lagging behind on climate change. Public Finance (December 7
2007).
Anon.,
2008a.
CO2
World
Cup.
Available
http://www.co2worldcup.org/carbonneutralcountries.htm Accessed: April, 2008.
at:
Anon., 2008b Local Government. Available at:
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/energy/startsaving/sectorselector/localgovernment_13.htm;
Accessed: March 4 2008.
Archer, J. and Bergsli, C., 2008. Norway says aims to go carbon neutral by 2030. Reuters.
Available
at:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUKL1766015320080117.
Accessed: February, 2008.
Auger, C.P., 1998. Information sources in Grey Literature, 4th Ed., Bowker Saur, London, UK.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2007. Wage and Salary Earners, Public Sector. Australian Federal
Government, Canberra, Australia.
Bäckstrand, K and Lövbrand, E., 2006. Planting Trees to Mitigate Climate Change: Contested
Discourses of Ecological Modernization, Green Governmentality and Civic Environmentalism.
Global Environmental Politics 6 (1), 50-75.
Ball, A., 2002. Sustainability Accounting in UK Local Government: An Agenda for Research,
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) Research Report No. 78, ACCA:
London, UK.
Ball, A. and Grubnic, S., 2007. Sustainability Accounting in the Public Sector. In: Sustainability
Accounting and Accountability, J. Unerman, J. Bebbington and B. O'Dwyer, eds., Routledge,
London, UK.
Becken, S., 2004. How Tourists and Tourism Experts Perceive Climate Change and Carbonoffsetting Schemes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 12 (4), 332-345.
18
Christianson, G.E., 1999. Greenhouse: the 200-year story of global warming. Walker and
Company, New York, USA.
Clark, H., 2007. Prime Minister's Statement. Hansard 637, 7237.
Coenen, F. and Menkveld, M., 2002. The role of local authorities in a transition towards a
climate-neutral society. In: Kok, M., Vermeulen, W., Faaij, A. and de Jager, D. (Eds) (2002)
Global Warming and Social Innovation: The Challenge of a Climate-Neutral Society, pp. 107-125.
Earthscan: London. UK.
Crane, A., 2000. Corporate Greening as Amoralisation. Organisation Studies 21(4), 673-696.
Defra. 2006 Sustainable operations on the Government estate., Department for Environment, Food
and
Rural
Affairs,
London,
UK.
Available
at
http://www.sustainabledevelopment.gov.uk/government/estates/index.htm Accessed: March 4, 2008,
Defra, 2007a Draft Climate Change Bill CM 7040. Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs, London, UK, March 2007
Defra, 2007b. Impact Assessment of the Climate Change Bill. Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs, London, UK, November 5 2007.
Defra, 2008. Government proposals for strengthening the Climate Change Bill. Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK, February 2008.
EPA Victoria, 2007a. Draft Carbon Management Principles Discussion Paper, Environment
Protection Authority Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Dyson, F. J., 1976. Can We Control Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere? Energy 2, 287-291.
EPA, Victoria. 2007b. EPA Goes Carbon Neutral. Environment Protection Authority, Victoria,
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Fineman, S., 2001. Fashioning the Environment. Organisation Studies 8(1), 17-31.
Gray, R., Dillard, J. and Spence, C., 2007. (Social) Accounting (Research) as if the World Matters:
Postalgia and a new absurdism’, paper presented to the Asia Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in
Accounting Conference, Auckland, New Zealand, 2007.
GreyNet, 2008. Grey Literature Network Service. Available at: http://www.greynet.org/
Accessed: February, 2008.
Gore, A., 2006. An inconvenient truth: the planetary emergency of global warming and what we
can do about it. Rodale Press, Emmaus, USA and Bloomsbury, London, UK.
Gore, A., et al. 2006. An inconvenient truth. Paramount Pictures Corporation, Hollywood, CA,
USA.
19
Gössling, S. Broderick, J, Upham, P., Ceron, J-P., Dubois, G., Peeters, P. and Strasdas, W., 2007.
Voluntary Carbon Offsetting Schemes for Aviation: Efficiency, Credibility and Sustainable
Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15 (3), 223-248.
Gough, C. and Shackely, S., 2001. The respectable politics of climate change: the epistemic
communities and NGOs. International Affairs 77 (2), 329-345.
Hall, B., 2006 Blair unveils Whitehall emissions plan. Financial Times, 13 June, 2006. London,
UK.
Huijts, N.M.A., Midden, C.J.H. and Meijnders, A.L., 2007. Social acceptance of carbon dioxide
storage. Energy Policy 35 (5), 2780-2789.
IPCC., 2002. Climate Change and Biodiversity, IPCC Technical Paper V, Geneva, Switzerland.
IPCC., 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, Geneva, Switzerland.
ISO. 2006., Greenhouse gases - Part 1: Specification with guidance at the organization level for
quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. ISO 14064-1.
International Standards Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jackall, R., (1988) Moral Mazes: The world of corporate managers. Oxford University Press, New
York, USA.
Jordan, A. and Lorenzi, I., 2007. Is There Now a Political Climate for Policy Change? Policy and
Politics after the Stern Review. The Political Quarterly 78 (2), 310-319.
Kerr, S., 2006. The political economy of structural reform in natural resource use: observations
from New Zealand. In: Paper prepared on behalf of Motu, Wellington, NZ, for the National
Economic Research Organisations Meeting, Paris, June, 2006.
Kok, M., Vermeulen, W., Faaij, A. and de Jager, D. (Eds), 2002. Global Warming and Social
Innovation: The Challenge of a Climate-Neutral Society. Earthscan, London, UK.
Lapsly, I. 2008. The NPM agenda: Back to the future. Financial Accountability and Management
24 (1), 77-95.
Levy, D.L. and Rothenberg, S., 2002. Heterogeneity and Change in Environmental Strategy:
Technological and Political Responses to Climate Change in the Global Automobile Industry’, in
Hoffman, A.J. and Ventresca, M.J. (2002) (eds) Organizations, Policy and the Natural
Environment, pp 173-190. Stanford University Press, CA, USA.
Liberal Democrats, 2007. Zero carbon Britain - taking a global lead. Policy Paper 82. Liberal
Democrat Image, Hampshire, UK, August 2007.
Marks, K., 2007. New Zealand aims to be greenest country. Independent. Available at:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/australasia/article2268094.ece. Accessed: February, 2008.
20
McPhaul, J., 2007a. Costa Rica aims to win "carbon neutral" race. Reuters. Available at:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N24389742.htm Accessed: February, 2008.
McPhaul, J., 2007b. Costa Rica pledges to be 'carbon neutral' by 2021. Reuters. Available at:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N07289157.htm. Accessed: February, 2008.
Metz, B. and van Vuuren, D., 2006. How and at what cost can low-level stabilization be achieved.
Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, H. J. Schellnhuber, ed., Cambridge University Press,
Cambidge, UK.
Meyer, A., 2000. Contraction and convergence: the global solution to climate change. Green
Books for the Schumacher Society; Devon, UK.
MfE, 2007a. POL(07)84 - Towards a Sustainable New Zealand: Overview. NZ Ministry for the
Environment, Wellington, New Zealand
MfE, 2007b. POL(07)131: Towards a Sustainable New Zealand: Carbon Neutral Public Service.
NZ Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand
MfE, 2007c. POL(07)215 - Towards a Sustainable New Zealand: Carbon Neutral Public Service Offset Portfolio. NZ Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand
MfE, 2007d. CAB(07)15 - Towards a Sustainable New Zealand: Next Steps. NZ Goverment,
Wellington, New Zealand
MfE, 2008. About Govt3. NZ Government, Wellington, New Zealand. Available at:
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/sustainable-industry/govt3/about.php Accessed: 18 April, 2008
Miller, V., 2008. Q & A: Ecotowns. Guardian.co.uk, Wednesday, February 13, 2008.
Milne, M.J., Kearins, K.N. and Walton, S., 2006. Creating Adventures in Wonderland? The
Journey Metaphor and Environmental Sustainability. Organization 13 (6), 801-839.
Milne, M.J., Ball, A. and Gray, R., 2007a. From soothing palliatives and towards ecological
literacy: A critique of the Triple Bottom Line. In: Proceedings of the 5th Asia-Pacific
Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting Conference, July 8-10, 2007, Auckland, New Zealand.
Milne, M.J., Tregidga, H. and Walton, S., 2007b. Words of Action: The Centrist and Pragmatic
Discourse of Sustainable Development Reporting, Working Paper, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, NZ.
Monbiot, G., 2006. Heat: how to stop the planet burning. Allen Lane, London, UK.
Oreskes, N., 2004. The scientific consensus on climate change. Science 306 (5702), 1686.
Orr, D., 2007. Optimism and hope in a hotter time. Conservation Biology 21 (6) 1392-1395.
21
Rann, M., 2008. Opening of the 3rd International Solar Cities Congress. In: 3rd International Solar
Cities Congress, February 18, 2008, Adelaide, Australia.
SDC, 2005. Climate Change Programme Review: the submission of the Sustainable Development
commission to HM Government. Sustainable Development Commission, London, UK.
SDC, 2006. Sustainable Development in Government: Annual Report 2006. Sustainable
Development Commission, London, UK.
SDC, 2007. Sustainable Development in Government: Annual Report 2007. Sustainable
Development Commission, London, UK.
Seager, A., 2007. Moving targets keep low-carbon economy on the back burner. The Guardian,
Monday, December 31, 2007.
Standard Life Investments, 2006. Carbon Management & Carbon Neutrality in the FTSE AllShare. July 2006, paper prepared with the Environment Agency, United Kingdom.
Smith, K., 2007. The carbon neutral myth: offset indulgences for your climate sins. Carbon Trade
Watch, Transnational Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Stern, N., 2006. The Economics of Climate Change., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK.
Tanner, L. and Wong, P., 2008, Strategic Review of Climate Change Policies, Joint Media
Release, PW 26/08, 27 February 2008, Canberra, Australia.
The Gold Standard, 2008. The Gold Standard: premium quality carbon credits. Available at:
http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org Accessed: April, 2008.
Thornes, J.E. and Randalls, S., 2007. Commodifying the Atmosphere: ‘Pennies from Heaven’?
Geografiska Annaler, Series A: Physical Geography 89 (4), 273–285.
Vermeulen, W. and Kok, M., 2002. Contemporary practices: greenhouse scepticism? In: Kok,
M., Vermeulen, W., Faaij, A. and de Jager, D. (Eds) (2002) Global Warming and Social
Innovation: The Challenge of a Climate-Neutral Society. pp 39-58. Earthscan, London, UK.
Verweij, M., Douglas, M., Ellis, R., Engel, C., Hendriks, F., Lohmann, L., Ney, S., Rayner, S. and
Thompson, M., 2006. Clumsy solutions for a complex world: The case of climate change. Public
Administration 84 (4), 817-843.
WBCSD/WRI., 2004. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting
Standard; Revised Edition. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva,
Switzerland; World Resources Institute, Washington DC, USA.
WCC, 2007. Council aims for carbon neutrality by 2012. Wellington City Council, Wellington,
New Zealand.
22
Weart, S.R., 2003. The Discovery of Global Warming. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA,
USA.
Wong, P. 2008. Government Announces Detailed Timetable on Emissions Trading, Media Release
PW 35/08, 17 March 2008, Canberra, Australia.
23