A Unified Vision for a Global Challenge
The global aviation sector finds itself at a crucial intersection. On one path lies a fragmented future shaped by regional or national levies; on the other, a unified international framework. At the heart of this debate is the International Civil Aviation Organization’s effort to rally support for a single market-based measure, known as the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation.
While many organizations are exploring aviation levies as potential funding sources for climate finance, ICAO’s message is clear. There is genuine concern that these proposals, although well-intentioned, may derail years of coordinated international progress.
The Story Behind CORSIA
ICAO’s journey toward a global solution began in the mid-1990s. What emerged from decades of negotiation and cooperation was CORSIA, the first sector-wide international agreement to address aviation emissions. Designed to achieve carbon-neutral growth from 2020, CORSIA avoids a patchwork of overlapping regional measures, ensuring that emissions are accounted for only once.
This scheme operates on a simple premise. When airlines cannot reduce emissions through efficiency gains or low-carbon fuels, they compensate by supporting verified emission reductions elsewhere. In doing so, CORSIA offers a scalable and harmonized mechanism that respects the unique operational nature of international aviation.
Concerns Over New Proposals
In light of the increased global commitment to climate finance—now targeting a staggering 300 billion dollars annually by 2030, with ambitions reaching over a trillion by 2035—several institutions have floated the idea of using international aviation and shipping as revenue streams.
The International Monetary Fund, among others, has suggested levies on aviation fuels or frequent flyer programs. These could indeed generate substantial funds, potentially reaching hundreds of billions of dollars. However, ICAO believes that such measures risk sidelining the coordinated framework painstakingly built over decades.
These proposals also raise significant legal, economic, and diplomatic concerns. Many bilateral air service agreements explicitly prohibit fuel taxes, and introducing such levies could impose additional burdens on developing nations and undermine their connectivity and economic growth.
Why a Global Measure Matters
International aviation operates across borders by nature. This makes a globally harmonized approach not only preferable but essential. CORSIA is designed to manage emissions that cannot be addressed through in-sector improvements like operational efficiency or sustainable aviation fuels.
Moreover, introducing parallel taxation or levy systems could disrupt investment signals, discourage innovation, and lead to double counting of emissions. This would erode the credibility of emissions reporting and complicate international cooperation, making it harder to achieve long-term sustainability targets.
Developing Countries and Equity Considerations
A key point of resistance to aviation levies comes from developing nations. For many, access to global markets and economic development depends heavily on affordable and efficient air connectivity. A uniform levy on tickets or fuel could disproportionately impact their national carriers and passengers, widening existing inequalities.
CORSIA, by contrast, includes a phased implementation that allows countries to participate voluntarily in the early stages and mandates involvement only later, giving time to build capacity and adapt.
Aligning Goals Without Duplication
The issue is not about whether aviation should contribute to climate goals—there is broad consensus that it must. The real question is how to do so in a way that maintains fairness, operational feasibility, and international cooperation.
A well-functioning global market-based measure achieves this balance. It avoids the inefficiencies of multiple overlapping systems and supports the long-term development of lower-carbon alternatives like sustainable aviation fuels and advanced aircraft technologies.
Opportunities for Enhancement, Not Replacement
Rather than replacing existing frameworks with new financial mechanisms, a more constructive approach might be to enhance current systems. This could include strengthening CORSIA’s offsetting criteria, ensuring transparency in credit markets, and aligning incentives for fuel switching and infrastructure development.
Funds raised through other mechanisms—if pursued—could also be directed back into the aviation sector. For example, supporting the deployment of clean technologies, upgrading airport infrastructure for energy efficiency, or funding access to sustainable fuels in developing countries.
Beyond Aviation: Lessons from Shipping
Interestingly, while ICAO is resisting fragmented economic measures, its maritime counterpart, the International Maritime Organization, has adopted a hybrid approach. The IMO is moving toward a global economic measure for shipping, paired with a greenhouse gas intensity standard.
While shipping and aviation share many challenges, they also differ in operational structure, regulatory history, and investment cycles. The IMO model may offer insights, but its applicability to aviation should be assessed cautiously.
The Bigger Picture: Cooperation in a Multipolar World
At a time when geopolitical fragmentation is increasing, the success of a global mechanism like CORSIA carries broader symbolic weight. It demonstrates that multilateralism can still function in tackling shared challenges, even in complex sectors like international aviation.
This is especially important as negotiations continue on broader international tax cooperation frameworks. Harmonizing fiscal tools with environmental objectives could unlock new sources of funding for climate adaptation and mitigation, but this must be done in a way that complements existing sectoral agreements.
Conclusion: Preserving Progress Through Pragmatism
Aviation emissions are a complex and pressing issue, and all ideas that aim to address them deserve careful consideration. However, the way forward should not undo the very progress that has made a global solution possible.
ICAO’s appeal to maintain the integrity of CORSIA is not a plea for inaction—it is a call for strategic alignment. Sustainable progress requires not just ambition but coordination, and that is the insight we must carry forward.
Rather than rush to build parallel structures, there is immense value in strengthening the tools already in place. In doing so, we can ensure that international aviation continues to connect the world—responsibly, equitably, and effectively.