Billions of pounds are being wasted in paying industries in developing countries to reduce climate change emissions, according to two analyses of the UN's carbon offsetting programme. Full Story »
Posted by Kaizar Campwala
The journalist relies on two recent studies to make some sweeping statements about the UN carbon offset program. The studies may be very credible, but by starting with "leading academics and watchdog groups" and then only quoting two academics and one watchdog group, he makes it difficult to know just how widespread the concerns really are. The UN, of course, defends the program. The reader is left to wonder who is right. So the article is important in highlighting a large potential problem; deficient in giving the reader any sense of why it matters or how much credibility the claims against the program have.
Explain why this potential abuse matters; provide some statement as to the credibility of the two studies being quoted, which lead to the headline: “Billions wasted on UN climate programme”