Report

Insights on Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification in Carbon Pricing

Developing effective and inclusive MRV systems

Every carbon pricing instrument rests on the quality of its emissions data. Drawing on desk research, expert interviews, and case studies of Quebec, Alberta, China, and the European Union, this report shows how monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) works across carbon pricing instruments and how governments can build MRV systems that are effective, inclusive, and support a just transition.

Recommendations

  • A reliable MRV system rests on institutional foundations established in law. Primary legislation defines covered entities, measurement and reporting obligations, verification standards, and penalties for non-compliance. These arrangements ensure data in the national emissions registry is accurate.

  • MRV systems must be designed for change. The methodologies, emissions factors, and reporting requirements they rely on evolve over time. So, MRV programs should allow regular updates because they improve continually through experience, trial and error, and changing environmental circumstances.

  • Transparency at every stage of the MRV process is the principal safeguard against data integrity failures and a foundation of system credibility. It makes reported emissions data easier to verify and accessible to the public, and clearly published rules make compliance simpler for covered entities.

  • MRV systems reviewed have not yet put gender equality and social inclusion or just transition principles into practice. Tiered requirements, participatory MRV, and disaggregated data can ease burdens on smaller emitters and widen who benefits from carbon pricing.

Robust MRV is the foundation on which every carbon pricing instrument rests. A price applied to inaccurate or unverified emissions data cannot deliver the abatement it is designed to produce. 

This report sets out how MRV works across common forms of carbon pricing, compliance emissions trading systems, carbon taxes, and offset crediting mechanisms, and what governments designing a domestic compliance market should take into account from international experience. The report draws on desk research into primary policy and regulation and academic literature, complemented by expert interviews, and on four case studies covering Quebec, Alberta, China, and the European Union. The case studies explore how each jurisdiction implements the steps of MRV, alongside their various challenges and approaches to non-compliance and distributional concerns. 

The report also considers who bears the costs of compliance and who can convert compliance into advantage. The systems reviewed have not yet put gender equality and social inclusion or just transition principles into practice in their governance arrangements, and the benefits of MRV remain unevenly accessible to smaller, less-resourced entities. 

Findings and recommendations are directed at policy-makers building MRV systems that are technically robust, transparent, adaptable, and socially just.