Article 6 in East Africa: How Uganda Compares to Kenya and Cameroon

Uganda's carbon market is building momentum — and the country's position within the broader East and Central African Article 6 landscape is becoming increasingly significant. As Kenya, Uganda, and Cameroon all develop their Article 6 frameworks under the Paris Agreement, buyers need to understand how each jurisdiction compares and where Uganda's competitive advantages are sharpest.

Uganda's Strengths: Biodiversity and Additionality

Uganda's case for Article 6 rests on two pillars: the extraordinary biodiversity of its protected landscapes and the demonstrable additionality of its conservation projects. The Bwindi Impenetrable Forest — home to approximately half the world's mountain gorillas — and the Albertine Rift wetlands represent some of the highest-value conservation carbon assets on the continent. Projects in these landscapes offer buyers not just emission reductions but verified, science-backed co-benefits that increasingly matter for corporate nature-positive commitments.

The Uganda Carbon Bureau, operating under the Ministry of Water and Environment, provides the regulatory oversight for carbon credit issuance. The government has been consistent in its support for Article 6 engagement, and Uganda's Redd+ Investment Programme (URIP) signals a national commitment to using forest carbon as a development finance tool.

Where Uganda Stands Relative to Kenya

Kenya has moved faster on Article 6 operationalization. Its bilateral agreements with Switzerland and Sweden are among the world's first live Article 6.2 ITMO arrangements, and Kenya's Carbon Markets Bill is progressing through parliament. Uganda has not yet signed ITMO agreements with buyer countries — placing it 12 to 24 months behind Kenya in Article 6 readiness.

One recent development worth watching: the July 2026 Article 6.4 Supervisory Body decision adopted a new methodology covering grid-connected renewable electricity — wind and solar can now earn PACM credits, with the prior restriction to small island states removed. This matters for Uganda, which has significant solar and hydro potential that could generate Article 6.4 credits alongside its forest pipeline. At the same time, the cookstoves methodology was sent back for revision, a setback for developers in this sector. Nigeria, by contrast, finalized its full Article 6 carbon framework at end-2025 — with at least three Corsia-tagged Nigerian cookstoves projects now operational — setting a regional benchmark that Uganda will want to match. Uganda-based developer UpEnergy made headlines in July 2026 when it secured Nigeria's first Corsia-tagged carbon credits, under a 3.8 million tCO2e Letter of Authorisation from Nigeria's National Council on Climate Change (VCS2673). It demonstrates that Uganda's carbon market expertise extends beyond its borders.

The Corresponding Adjustment Fee — Getting It Right

A warning from elsewhere in the region: at a recent climate investment forum, Bhutan presented 36 Article 6 projects totalling 5.08 million tCO2e per year, but developers pushed back on Bhutan's proposed $5–25/tCO2e corresponding adjustment (CA) fee — arguing it priced projects out of the market. Bhutan has acknowledged it may need to revise. Uganda faces the same tension: the CA fee it ultimately sets will directly determine whether its Article 6 pipeline becomes commercially viable or stalls. Getting this right is the single most important policy decision Uganda's Article 6 framework needs to resolve.

Cameroon: The Congo Basin Comparison

Cameroon brings a different dimension to the regional picture. Its 22 million hectares of Congo Basin forest give it the largest raw carbon potential of the three countries, but its Article 6 framework is still at negotiation stage. The June 2026 update from the DRC Ministry of Environment — showing 71 active REDD+ concessions covering 17.7 million hectares across the border — illustrates the sheer scale of the Congo Basin opportunity that Cameroon is part of.

Institutional Confidence is Rising Across Africa

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

The Buyer's Calculus

Uganda may not be the most advanced Article 6 jurisdiction in the region today, but its ecological quality and regulatory trajectory make it a critical component of any serious regional carbon portfolio. Pairing Uganda's biodiversity-premium credits with Kenya's already-authorized Article 6 supply provides both near-term compliance value and a long-term premium asset — a combination that is hard to replicate from a single-country position.

Related reading: For the Kenya perspective, visit co2.ke. For the Cameroon and Congo Basin angle, visit co2.cm.