Liberia’s draft Carbon Policy, designed to position the country in the global carbon market, has received mixed reviews from climate experts. While praised for its inclusive consultations, critics warn that it falls short on key climate mitigation commitments and risks undermining Liberia’s achieving its climate goals.
National Climate Expert Isaac Nyaneyon Kannah commended the government for engaging a broad spectrum of stakeholders during recent consultations in Ganta, Nimba County, including county superintendents, ministries and agencies, private sector actors, and community representatives.
“The consultation process was commendable and inclusive,” Kannah said. “It reflects Liberia’s commitment to participatory policymaking and ensures that diverse voices are heard in shaping national climate policy.”
The draft policy provides a framework for generating and trading carbon credits under the Paris Agreement, with the potential to attract climate finance, support sustainable development, create jobs, and maintain environmental integrity. However, experts warn that the policy’s emphasis on trading could compromise Liberia’s domestic emission reduction efforts.
“The policy is primarily designed as a carbon trading framework, not a mitigation strategy,” Kannah explained. “It is silent on how Liberia will achieve its Nationally Determined Contributions in reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 64% as committed.”
Kannah highlighted several critical issues. He noted that the policy places an overemphasis on trading, with credits generated largely intended for export, providing minimal impact on domestic emission reductions. He also pointed out contradictions with Liberia’s commitments, as prioritizing offsets for other countries risks criticism while Liberia has pledged significant domestic emission reductions. Furthermore, the policy maintains a forestry-centric focus, neglecting other important sectors such as energy, waste, and transport.
He also raised concerns about land rights, observing that assigning ownership of carbon credits solely to the government conflicts with Liberia’s Land Rights Act and could discourage private investment. Transparency and accountability mechanisms are underdeveloped, which could undermine the credibility of Liberia’s carbon credits. Additionally, short-lived climate pollutants such as methane and black carbon, which are significant contributors to climate change, are not addressed in the draft.
Kannah further criticized contradictions between policy and political actions, citing recent debates over the potential de-gazetting of protected areas. “It is unthinkable for a legislator to mention about de-gazetting the Sapo National Park.”
“A serious country cannot be proposing carbon trading on one hand while weakening forest protection on the other,” he stressed.
To address these gaps, Kannah recommended rebalancing the policy to prioritize domestic mitigation alongside trading, strengthening transparency and registry governance, expanding the policy’s scope beyond forestry, and ensuring carbon ownership aligns with land rights laws.
“Liberia’s Draft Carbon Policy is a bold step forward, but in its current form, it risks undermining the very climate commitments we have made to the international community,” he concluded. “If Liberia wants to be taken seriously in global climate negotiations, our words, policies, and actions must match.”
