Article 6 of the Paris Agreement creates an international framework for cooperation between countries and/or entities. Article 6.2 focuses on internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs), while Article 6.4 establishes a new UN crediting mechanism, known as the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM). Article 6.8 is about non-market approaches.

With global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions still rising and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) collectively falling short of the ambition needed to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, there is an urgent need for effective tools to drive ambitious climate action. If applied with integrity, Article 6 could be such a tool, supporting higher ambition, mobilising finance, and promoting sustainable development. Without strong safeguards, however, it risks undermining the goals of the Paris Agreement and delaying emission reductions.

Why these Principles?

The international rules for Articles 6, especially under 6.2 set a minimum standard for integrity, leaving actors with significant discretion. To support responsible engagement that ensures climate integrity, strong safeguards, and greater ambition, this guidance introduces the Oxford Principles for Responsible Engagement with Article 6. Building on the San José Principles and grounded in science, these principles provide high-level direction and criteria for countries and entities participating in carbon trading, complementing – rather than replacing – the existing Article 6 rules.

“The original intent of Article 6 – to enable higher climate ambition – was diluted during the negotiations of the Rulebook. The Oxford Principles for Responsible Engagement with Article 6 now seek to restore that ambition by calling for stronger standards and for ensuring that the mechanism does not create incentives to reduce overall climate action. In particular, they emphasise that buyer countries must first take robust domestic action before relying on Article 6 credits to avoid deterring mitigation efforts.” – Juliette de Grandpré, NewClimate Institute

The following three principles should guide all actors engaging in Article 6 activities:

• Principle One: Paris-aligned use of mitigation outcomes
• Principle Two: Generation of high-quality mitigation outcomes; and
• Principle Three: Robust accounting and transparency in engaging in Article 6.

The principles apply to host countries, buyer countries, buying entities, activity developers, and intermediaries.

Principle One : Ensure that the use of mitigation outcomes is aligned with the Paris Agreement

Ensuring engagement with Article 6 raises climate ambition in line with the Paris Agreement

• Host countries and other buying entities should be on track to meet targets which represent a science-aligned contribution to global net-zero before they can use Article 6, to ensure enhancing ambition. All actors should ensure mitigation outcomes deliver significant sustainable development benefits. Outcomes should be shared equitably between buyer and host, with a portion retained by the host to support domestic ambition.
• To contribute to global goals, at least 2% of ITMOs should be cancelled and at least 5% of proceeds directed to adaptation.

Developing and implementing responsible Article 6 engagement strategies and governance arrangements

• Host and buyer countries should develop public, regularly reviewed strategies that align Article 6 engagement with NDCs and long-term strategies.
• Mitigation outcomes and associated financial flows should not be used to finance activities under unconditional NDCs.
• Clear governance frameworks are needed, including roles for authorisation and transactions, robust national regulation, and safeguards against conflicts of interest.
• All actors should promote transparency, including on pricing and revenue flows, to ensure accountable implementation.
   

Principle Two : Ensure mitigation outcomes have climate integrity and uphold social and environmental safeguards

• Ensuring the climate integrity of mitigation outcomes

All actors should apply strong additionality thresholds, ensure conservative and robust quantification, and avoid locking in high-emission practices; they must also prevent double use and claiming, manage reversal risks, and issue mitigation outcomes proportionally when combining climate finance with carbon revenues. Additionally, crediting programmes should uphold rigorous governance with transparent, accountable procedures and safeguards against conflicts of interest.

• Upholding environmental and social safeguards of mitigation outcomes

Activities should involve early and ongoing consultation with affected local communities and Indigenous Peoples, identify and disclose potential negative impacts, avoid harm to biodiversity, water, livelihoods, and cultural heritage, and ensure co-benefit arrangements are fully implemented in alignment with local needs, respecting customary rights and knowledge.

Principle Three : Ensure Robust Accounting and Transparent Engagement with Article 6

• Applying robust accounting practices for cooperative approaches under Article 6.2

Countries engaging in cooperative approaches under Article 6.2 should ensure robust accounting systems. This includes robust national GHG inventories, strong NDC foundation, full NDC coverage, and host country authorisations. 

• Transparency on the use and generation of mitigation outcomes

All actors should provide transparent and publicly accessible information on the use and generation of ITMOs and carbon credits. Buyer countries and buying entities should report how, when, and for what purposes mitigation outcomes are used, while host countries should disclose data on issuance and transfers. This includes specifying mitigation activities, serial numbers, authorisation status, and aggregated summaries by activity type.  

This work was led by the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment and the University of Oxford. NewClimate’s co-authorship is part of the ACHIEVE project.