Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Carbon credit does not buy moral credit: moral licensing and perceived hypocrisy of carbon emission offsetting and reduction

Chu, Haoran, Yuan, Shupei·2025·Climatic Change
DOI 10.1007/s10584-025-03897-5
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10584-025-03897-5

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Anderson B, Bernauer T (2016) How much carbon offsetting and where? Implications of efficiency, effectiveness, and ethicality considerations for public opinion formation. Energy Policy 94:387–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.04.016 · DOI
  2. Austin MMK, Converse BA (2021) In search of weakened resolve: does climate-engineering awareness decrease individuals’ commitment to mitigation? J Environ Psychol 78:101690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101690 · DOI
  3. Baranzini A, Borzykowski N, Carattini S (2018) Carbon offsets out of the woods? Acceptability of domestic vs. international reforestation programmes in the lab. J Forest Econ 32:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2018.02.004 · DOI
  4. Bartels L, Kesternich M, Löschel A (2021) The demand for voluntary carbon sequestration–experimental evidence from a reforestation project in Germany. ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper · DOI
  5. Coase RH (2013) The problem of social cost. J Law Econ 56:837–877. https://doi.org/10.1086/674872 · DOI
  6. Corner A, Pidgeon N (2014) Geoengineering, climate change scepticism and the ‘moral hazard’ argument: an experimental study of UK public perceptions. Philos Trans Math Phys Eng Sci 372:20140063. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0063 · DOI
  7. Hayes AF (2017) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis, second edition: A Regression-Based approach. Guilford
  8. Hepburn C (2007) Carbon trading: A review of the Kyoto mechanisms. Annu Rev Environ Resour 32:375–393. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.32.053006.141203 · DOI
  9. Jordan JJ, Sommers R, Bloom P, Rand DG (2017) Why do we hate hypocrites? Evidence for a theory of false signaling. Psychol Sci 28:356–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616685771 · DOI
  10. Lee D-H, Kim D, Kim S (2018) Characteristics of forest carbon credit transactions in the voluntary carbon market. Clim Policy 18:235–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1277682 · DOI
  11. Leviston Z, Walker I (2021) The influence of moral disengagement on responses to climate change. Asian J Soc Psychol 24:144–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12423 · DOI
  12. Lou J, Hultman N, Patwardhan A, Mintzer I (2023) Corporate motivations and co-benefit valuation in private climate finance investments through voluntary carbon markets. Npj Clim Action 2:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-023-00063-4 · DOI
  13. Markowitz EM (2012) Is climate change an ethical issue? Examining young adults’ beliefs about climate and morality. Clim Change 114:479–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0422-8 · DOI
  14. McLaren DP, Tyfield DP, Willis R et al (2019) Beyond net-zero: a case for separate targets for emissions reduction and negative emissions. Front Clim 1:4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2019.00004 · DOI
  15. Merritt AC, Effron DA, Monin B (2010) Moral Self-Licensing: when being good frees Us to be bad. Soc Pers Psychol Compass 4:344–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00263.x · DOI
  16. Moore C (2015) Moral disengagement. Curr Opin Psychol 6:199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.07.018 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Peters GP, Geden O (2017) Catalysing a political shift from low to negative carbon. Nat Clim Change 7:619–621. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3369 · DOI
  18. Rosselló LBF, Bestard AB, Font AR (2024) Is carbon footprint reduction always preferred over offsetting? An analysis of tourists’ preferences in the Mallorca region. Economic Analysis and Policy
  19. Tiefenbeck V, Staake T, Roth K, Sachs O (2013) For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign. Energy Policy 57:160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.01.021 · DOI
  20. Van Vuuren DP, Stehfest E, Gernaat DE et al (2018) Alternative pathways to the 1.5 C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies. Nat Clim Change 8:391–397. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0119-8 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Chu, H., & Yuan, S.
Venue
Climatic Change
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2025-03
Volume
178
Issue
3
ISSN
  • 0165-0009
  • 1573-1480
DOI
10.1007/s10584-025-03897-5
Cited by
3
References
4
Language
en
Licence
Funders
Arthur W. Page Center for Integrity in Public Communication (Arthur W. Page Center for Integrity in Public Communication)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Carbon credit does not buy moral credit: moral licensing and perceived hypocrisy of carbon emission offsetting and reduction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10584-025-03897-5
The paper
Chu, H., & Yuan, S. (2025). Carbon credit does not buy moral credit: moral licensing and perceived hypocrisy of carbon emission offsetting and reduction. Climatic Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-025-03897-5

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.