The term ‘net zero’ was intended to refer to the collective global emissions created by the whole of society. ‘Net zero’ makes much less sense as a target for individuals or organisations. 

Rather than setting ‘net zero’ targets and trying to ‘cancel out’ emissions, it makes far more sense for each individual or organisation to simply focus on the side of the global balance sheet (emissions or absorptions) where they have the most influence or responsibility. For most in the art world, this will be emissions.

Despite this, many organisations have - in good faith - set ‘net zero’ or ‘carbon neutral’ targets that rely on carbon offsetting.

Carbon offsetting means paying someone else to reduce or remove emissions that will ‘cancel out’ your own.

Typically, these schemes sell ‘carbon credits’ that equate to the quantity of CO2e emitted. This money is then spent on projects that either claim to draw CO2e out of the atmosphere, like tree planting, or prevent future emissions, like renewable energy projects.

In practice, this often means that organisations reduce some emissions but ultimately use potentially ineffectual offsetting schemes to reach ‘net zero’.

This is why GCC advises its members against the use of conventional carbon offsetting and individual net zero targets, and this is where the Strategic Climate Fund policy comes in. Strategic Climate Funds are a way to encourage our members to step up their ambitions and support frontline climate solutions without getting tangled up in problematic carbon neutral targets or offsetting schemes.

 

SCF Presentation Slide Deck PDF
Full SCF Policy PDF

 

 

 

 

Further reading on ‘net zero’ targets and carbon offsetting: