With COP30 now underway in Brazil’s Belém, the focus must move from declarations to delivery.
Climate finance will be a central focus at this year’s COP. Beyond that, the rollout of Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, known as the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism, presents a rare chance to make global carbon markets more inclusive and responsive to people’s needs.
For India and other developing countries, this mechanism could help connect global climate ambition with the everyday realities of small and marginal farmers and forest-dependent communities.
From Pledges to Participation
At COP29 in Baku, nations agreed to triple annual climate finance to $300 billion by 2035, and ahead of COP30, the UNFCCC released the “Baku to Belém” Roadmap, outlining a plan to mobilise $1.3 trillion in climate finance annually by 2035, which includes this $300 billion commitment.
While money is a key pillar of climate justice, a less discussed but arguably more consequential outcome in Baku was the adoption of rules for Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, as it created a transparent, science-based, and socially responsive framework to replace the older Clean Development Mechanism.
The Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism provides a framework for countries to cooperate voluntarily in achieving their climate goals.
It allows countries and private entities to create internationally transferable mitigation outcomes, or carbon credits, that can be traded globally under strong safeguards to help meet their respective climate commitments.
The challenge now lies in ensuring that this new system does not remain a tool for large corporate projects alone.
Unless it is designed to include smallholders, community forest groups and rural cooperatives, climate finance will continue to bypass the people who nurture the land and sustain forests. Inclusivity must therefore be at the heart of the Article 6.4 design.
Why Article 6.4 Matters for India
India’s land and forest mosaic is dominated by small and marginal farmers who make up more than 85 percent of all cultivators. Most own less than two hectares of land.
Alongside them live millions of households that depend on forest resources for daily sustenance. Together they form the backbone of India’s mitigation and adaptation efforts, yet they have seldom benefitted from carbon finance because current systems are complex and expensive.
Article 6.4 can help change this. Its flexibility allows for aggregation models that combine many small land parcels under one project, reducing transaction costs and simplifying monitoring.
For example, hundreds of small farmers adopting agroforestry on half-hectare plots or forest-fringe villages restoring degraded lands could form collective projects verified through satellite-based monitoring.
Such initiatives can earn measurable emission-reduction credits and translate them into additional income. For a family earning about Rs 80,000 a year, even an annual addition of Rs 10,000-15,000 from carbon revenue can make a tangible difference and encourage sustainable land use.
The benefits are not limited to income. Carbon projects often bring improved soil fertility, better water retention and enhanced biodiversity. When communities have a financial stake in sustainable practices, environmental restoration becomes part of their livelihood rather than an external demand.
Article 6.4, therefore, holds potential to turn rural and forest landscapes into self-sustaining carbon sinks that reward stewardship instead of extraction.
Building Institutions for Inclusion
To realise this vision, robust local institutions are essential. Farmer Producer Organisations, Joint Forest Management Committees and community cooperatives need training, data access, and financial support to measure, report and verify emission reductions.
A dedicated technical assistance facility under the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body could provide simplified digital tools and capacity-building programmes.
India’s own experience with participatory forestry and watershed management offers valuable lessons on how to link local participation with transparent monitoring.
Transparency and equity must remain central. The mechanism requires free, prior and informed consent, gender-balanced representation and fair sharing of revenues.
These principles are vital to prevent elite capture and ensure that benefits reach those whose actions generate the credits. Projects should allocate a fixed percentage of carbon income to community development funds supporting education, livelihood diversification and women’s collectives. Such reinvestment would convert carbon finance from a transactional scheme into a long-term development instrument.
Inclusivity also means aligning India’s domestic and international carbon systems. The upcoming Carbon Credit Trading Scheme under the Bureau of Energy Efficiency can be harmonised with Article 6.4 to allow mutual recognition of credits.
This would enable Indian agroforestry and soil-carbon projects to access global markets while retaining national oversight. A harmonised structure would attract private investment, reduce duplication and strengthen India’s position as a rule-shaper in the evolving carbon economy.
Technology can make this process both efficient and transparent. Satellite imagery, drones and open digital registries can cut verification costs and allow small projects to compete with large industrial ventures. Open data can also build trust among investors, regulators and communities, ensuring that every tonne of carbon removed corresponds to a verified livelihood gain.
Action and Opportunity at Belém
Belém must now convert frameworks into field-level action. COP30 should endorse simplified methodologies for smallholder agroforestry, assisted natural regeneration and degraded land rehabilitation.
These are the areas where India already has community experience and institutional depth.
A dedicated global window to fund pilot projects from smallholder-dominated countries could accelerate early adoption and demonstrate success stories.
For India, integrating Article 6.4 into its broader climate and rural development strategy will be essential. Collaboration among government agencies, research institutes and local organisations can identify priority districts and develop scalable models.
A transparent national registry that captures both carbon and social outcomes can showcase the integrity of India’s approach and encourage replication in other developing countries.
As COP30 unfolds in the heart of the Amazon, the symbolism is powerful. Forests and farmlands, whether in the Amazon basin or in the Sundarbans, are at the core of global climate stability.
If Article 6.4 is implemented with true inclusivity, it can transform carbon markets from accounting tools into engines of justice and opportunity.
For millions of small and marginal farmers and forest-dependent communities in India, it would mean recognition, dignity and a share in the benefits of climate action.
COP30 must ensure that Article 6.4 becomes a silver light that links global ambition with local empowerment and turns carbon finance into a genuine force for sustainable and equitable development.
(Sayanta Ghosh is Associate Fellow, Land Resources, and Dr Jitendra Vir Sharma is Senior Director, Land Resources at The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI). This is an opinion piece, and the views expressed are those of the authors. The Quint does not necessarily endorse them.)