Article 6 in East and Central Africa: Where Does Kenya Stand?

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement creates a legal framework for countries to trade emission reductions across borders — allowing a buyer country to count credits generated in a seller country toward its own nationally determined contribution (NDC). For carbon credit buyers and project developers, the Article 6 landscape in Africa matters because it determines which credits command the highest premiums and which countries offer the most regulatory certainty.

Kenya: Africa's Article 6 Pioneer

Kenya has established itself as the continent's most advanced Article 6 jurisdiction. The bilateral agreement signed with Switzerland in 2021 was among the first operational Article 6.2 arrangements globally, allowing Switzerland to count Kenyan emission reductions toward its own NDC. Kenya subsequently signed a similar host-country agreement with Sweden, and negotiations with Japan and other European buyers are ongoing.

On the legislative side, Kenya's Carbon Markets Bill — currently in parliament — would provide a comprehensive domestic legal framework for carbon credit issuance, transfer, and Article 6 authorization. With over 40 registered VCS projects already operating, a substantial portion of Kenya's existing pipeline could become eligible for Article 6 authorization once the domestic framework is finalized. Credits authorized under Article 6 typically command prices two to three times higher than comparable voluntary market credits. In July 2026, the IEA named Kenya as a government partner in its $900 million clean cooking financing initiative — one of only three governments (alongside the US and Norway) co-chairing the effort, which has now mobilised $740 million across 22 African countries.

A note of caution from the UNFCCC: the July 2026 decision by the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body to send the cookstoves methodology back for revision is a setback for Kenyan cookstove developers who had been counting on it. The good news is the same body adopted a new methodology for grid-connected renewable electricity — removing the prior restriction to small island states — which opens Article 6.4 credit generation to Kenyan wind and solar projects for the first time.

Uganda: Strong Pipeline, Early-Stage Framework

Uganda has one of Africa's most compelling carbon project pipelines — anchored by the Bwindi Impenetrable Forest, which shelters roughly half the world's mountain gorillas, and the Albertine Rift wetlands. The Uganda Carbon Bureau oversees the regulatory process, and the government has signaled strong support for Article 6 engagement. However, Uganda has not yet signed internationally transferred mitigation outcome (ITMO) agreements with any buyer country, placing it at an earlier stage than Kenya. For buyers who can afford to wait for regulatory clarity, Uganda's biodiversity-rich landscapes represent an attractive long-term positioning opportunity.

Cameroon: Anchored in the Congo Basin

Cameroon's Article 6 strategy is deeply linked to its role in the Congo Basin Forest Partnership. The country's REDD+ national strategy is explicitly designed to align with Article 6 mechanisms, and the government has entered negotiations with France and several EU buyers. Cameroon's 22 million hectares of moist tropical forest give it one of the largest potential credit generation bases on the continent.

The Corresponding Adjustment Fee — a Lesson from Bhutan

A critical dynamic that buyers and host countries must watch is the corresponding adjustment (CA) fee — the charge host governments levy on projects to cover the NDC accounting impact of credit exports. At a recent climate investment forum, Bhutan presented 36 Article 6 projects totalling 5.08 million tCO2e per year, but developers pushed back hard on Bhutan's proposed CA fee range of $5–25/tCO2e, arguing it priced projects out of the market. Bhutan acknowledged it may need to revise. Kenya, Uganda, and Cameroon face the same tension: set the CA fee too high and you suppress developer interest; set it too low and you give away national carbon value. Getting this right will determine how quickly each country's Article 6 pipeline actually moves.

Institutional Confidence is Rising

A telling signal: in mid-2026, specialist carbon insurance firm Kita received investment from Tokio Marine Group (Japan). Kita explicitly cited "several African countries bolstering their carbon credit frameworks in the past 12 months" as the trigger — the firm is now actively underwriting political risk for Article 6 and Corsia deals in Africa. When major Japanese insurers start pricing African carbon risk, it signals that institutional confidence has reached a genuine inflection point.

What This Means for Buyers

Kenya offers the most immediate Article 6 opportunity — existing projects can be authorized today, and the regulatory pathway is clear. Uganda offers a compelling biodiversity story and strong additionality, but buyers should anticipate a 12–24 month wait before Article 6 ITMOs are available. Cameroon offers the largest potential volumes but the longest timeline to full Article 6 operationalization. For sophisticated buyers, diversifying across all three markets provides portfolio resilience. The East and Central African region, taken as a whole, is shaping up to be the most significant source of Article 6 credits in Africa over the next decade.

Related reading: For the Uganda perspective on this comparison, visit co2.ug. For the Cameroon and Congo Basin angle, visit co2.cm.