Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKP) And Smart Contracts For Automated Cross-Border Carbon Audit : A Decentralized Techno-Economic Framework

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35968/4h2zt651

Keywords:

Carbon Audit, Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, Smart Contract, Techno-economic, Zero-knowledge proof

Abstract

The rise of cross-border carbon regulations such as the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) demands emission verification systems trusted across multiple jurisdictions. However, conventional carbon audits remain manual, slow, costly, and prone to manipulation, while existing blockchain-based solutions require full disclosure of emissions data — conflicting with multinational corporations' need to protect confidential production information. This study proposes a decentralized framework integrating Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKP) and smart contracts to automate cross-border carbon auditing, employing a Design Science Research approach at the conceptual design level. The framework comprises four layers: data collection, proof generation, smart contract verification, and cross-jurisdictional interoperability, with Groth16 and the Perpetual Powers of Tau trusted setup as core cryptographic components. Techno-economic estimates derived from literature benchmarks indicate an on-chain verification cost of approximately 220,000 gas per transaction and verification times on the order of seconds to minutes, potentially far more efficient than conventional manual audit cycles that may span a year or more. This study also identifies privacy-adaptability and automation-legal flexibility trade-offs that must be managed in real-world implementation. Key contributions include the architectural design, economic feasibility analysis, and policy implications for regulators, with empirical validation through prototype development proposed as future research.

References

Bonnet, A., & Baršauskaitė, I. (2025). The state of BCAs 2025. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2025-02/state-of-bcas-2025.pdf

Clausing, K., Colmer, J., Hsiao, A., & Wolfram, C. (2025). The global effects of carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CEPR Discussion Paper No. 20277). CEPR Press. https://cepr.org/publications/dp20277

Dalui, A., Patra, R. K., Tiwary, J., & Jeeva, S. (2026). Decentralized framework for transparent carbon credit verification and exchange using blockchain technology. In Proceedings of the 2026 Third International Conference on Networking and Communications (ICNWC). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNWC68145.2026.11518336

Deng, S., & Du, B. (2023). zkTree: A zero-knowledge recursion tree with ZKP membership proofs. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2023/208. https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/208

European Commission Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union. (2026). Carbon border adjustment mechanism: Do you import any of these products into the EU? Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2778/0161492

Guo, H., Feng, Y., Wu, C., Li, Z., & Xu, J. (2024). Benchmarking ZK-friendly hash functions and SNARK proving systems for EVM-compatible blockchains. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.01976

Heiss, J., Oegel, T., Shakeri, M., & Tai, S. (2023). Verifiable carbon accounting in supply chains. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 17(4), 1861–1874. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSC.2023.3332831

Man, J., Jaffer, S., Ferris, P., Kleppmann, M., & Madhavapeddy, A. (2025). Emission impossible: Privacy-preserving carbon emissions claims. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.16347

Meister, B. K., & Price, H. C. W. (2024). Gas fees on the Ethereum blockchain: From foundations to derivative valuations. Frontiers in Blockchain, 7, Article 1462666. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2024.1462666

Mercer, T., & Burke, J. (2025). Towards improved cost estimates for monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide removal. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/towards-improved-cost-estimates-for-monitoring-reporting-and-verification-of-carbon-dioxide-removal/

Paramitha, A. S., & Tarigan, M. (2025). Analysis of gas fee patterns in blockchain transactions: A case study on Ethereum smart contracts. Journal of Current Research in Blockchain, 2(3), 180–189. https://doi.org/10.47738/jcrb.v2i3.41

Vatiero, M. (2022). Smart contracts vs incomplete contracts: A transaction cost economics viewpoint. Computer Law & Security Review, 46, Article 105710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105710

Wang, J. S. (2026). HFI-Pay: Privacy-preserving, cross-chain cryptocurrency payments to human-friendly identifiers. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.26970

Wang, Y., Sun, Y., & Miao, Y. (2023). Management of enterprise carbon emissions data falsification considering government regulation and media monitoring. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, Article 1302089. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1302089

Xiong, Y., Ding, L., Guo, S., Choi, T.-M., & Lam, H. K. S. (2025). The impact of blockchain-enabled smart contracts on firms' operational efficiency. Journal of Operations Management, 71(7), 939–963. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.70006

Downloads

Published

2026-07-14

How to Cite

Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKP) And Smart Contracts For Automated Cross-Border Carbon Audit : A Decentralized Techno-Economic Framework. (2026). Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Akuntansi, 6(2), 91-102. https://doi.org/10.35968/4h2zt651